Displaying items by tag: Peter Malone's Movie Reviews

NO OTHER LAND

Occupied Palestinian Territory, 2024, 95 minutes, Colour.

Directed by Basel Adra, Yuval Abraham, Hamdan Ballal.

West Bank, 2019-2023, eyewitness photography, close ups on people, events on the record.

Palestinian law student, Basel Adra, remembers his upbringing on the West Bank, the protests during the 2000s, the Israeli military, conflict. With his camera and his phone, he began filming the arrival of Israeli military, into the villages of Masafer Yatta, in the hills near Hebron, tanks and heavy machinery sent in to demolish houses and homes, sometimes schools, often with very little time for locals to remove their possessions. And there were other photographers who joined over the years.

Basel became friendly with an Israeli journalist, Yuval Abraham, who took the side of the evicted Palestinians, writing articles, witnessing the incursions, empathising with the people, a bond with Basel, much the same age, living only 30 km from each other, Yuval free to move, Basel not allowed to cross borders, studies in the past but not able to practice law, admiring his father who was jailed in past protests, but now running a small service station. Yuval is impatient for some justice, but Basel reminds him that this struggle has been going on for a very long time, long-suffering patience and protest.

The film’s perspective is that of the Palestinians eliciting audience empathy, as we watch the planned destruction of homes over the years, some families having to move and live, literally, in caves. The view of the Israeli military is unsympathetic, tanks, guns, the heavy equipment, personal hostility. The official reason given for the demolition is that Israel wanted this area for a military training ground – but, an indication later in the film states that this was an official pretext for the removal of the Palestinians.

While there are many intense discussions between Basel and Yuval, the cameras spend a great deal of time personalising the issue, especially scenes with playful children, anxious women, roadside protests, the arrest and imprisonment of Basel’s father.

The dire situations shown are reminiscent of the behaviour of colonial powers in the 19^th century, alarming that there should be such “colonial” superior attitudes from one group towards another in the 21^st-century. And for many years, this has been symbolised by the high wall separation between Israel and the West Bank.

There is a postscript to the film  with final footage taken at the end of 2023. Then came the brutal  Hamas’ attack, the hostages, the bombardment of Gaza. Audiences will look at No Other Land with some dismay at the events 2019-2023 but also in the light of the increasingly vast warfare of 2024, the effect on Israel, the grim experience of Palestinians.

1. The title and its tone? Sad? The experience of Palestinians, the West Bank, Gaza?
2. The director young, his background, studies, lack of opportunity, his camera, phone, the filming, the other photographers, the range of material, the editing, pace, evocative?
3. The situation for the villages of Masafer Yatta, the Palestinians living there for so long, their homes, work, flocks? The focus on the ordinary people, the children and their play, school, innocence? The adults, the men and their role, the role of the women?
4. Basel, the scenes of his childhood, the protests, his father going to jail? Growing up with this perspective? His filming, his commentary? Admiration for his father? His father in jail in the past, the service station, participating in the protests, going to jail again?
5. Yuval, Israeli journalist, his arriving, sympathies, people wary, friendship, hospitality? The filming? His discussions with Basel, incorporated into the film, his opportunities, education, living 30 km away, freedom of movement, contrasting with Basel and his experiences and limitations? His impatience for things to be achieved, Basel tempering his expectations?
6. The Israeli military, the training ground for the Army, the soldiers, their weapons, the tanks, the heavy equipment, the quick demolition of the homes, the inhabitants trying to save their possessions, some having to live in caves, setting themselves up, the scene of fighting for the generator against the military? Another step in their experience of oppression?
7. The period of four years, the succession of years and the gradual elimination of the homes, scattering of the flocks, the episode of the children at school the demolition of the school?
8. The filming of the Israeli military, that action, hostilities, the protests and clashes, the shooting of one man, hospital, quadriplegic, living in the cave, cared for by his mother, the journalist coming to photograph him, but not necessarily helping him? The report of his death?
9. The scene of the settlers, neighbours, their homes compared with the Palestinian homes, 2024, the settlers attacking the Palestinians, with weapons, shooting?
10. The protests, Basel and his involvement, his father and his determination, the confrontations with the military, being in jail, effecting his release?
11. The sadness of the women, homes, caring for the children, for the injured? The care and anguish of the mother of the quadriplegic? The children and their playfulness, experiencing this kind of operation?
12. October 2023, the consequences for Israel, for Gaza, for those in the West Bank?
13. For audiences around the world, remembering Palestine, British rule, the state of Israel, the status of the Palestinians, the wars, power, and in the light of 2024?

UN MONDE/ PLAYGROUND

Belgium, 2021, 78 minutes, Colour.

Maya Vanderbeque, Gunter Duret.

Directed by Laura Wandel.

In 2002, director, Nicholas Philibert, made a classic documentary about primary school education, focusing on a rural school with children, 4-11, just one teacher, Etre et Avoir, To Be and To Have.

Almost 20 years later, here is a significant primary school film to be placed alongside Philibert’s classic.

This is a brief film, set entirely in a school playground in Belgium, the camera and filming always at the eye level of children, enabling/forcing audiences to see from the child’s perspective.

There is an extraordinary performance by the nine-year-old Maya Vanderbeque as Nora. At a new school, initially unwilling as she farewells her father who drops her at the gate, venturing in, reticent and shy, seeing her gradually changing, relating, finding some friends, helped by teachers. But, there is her older brother, Abel, who is bullied by a group of boys, sometimes quite brutally, bashed, head in the toilet, thrown into a garbage bin…

And this has an effect, rather bewildering, on Nora. Her brother tells her not to tell their father but eventually she does, with some remedying of the situation – except the bad effect on Abel, and his indulging in some bullying himself.

The brief running time, the focus is very much on the playground, the children, behaviour in the playground, play, bullying, and some classroom sequences, the swimming pool, athletics.

The film does end with a plaintive sequence between brother and sister – not without hope.

1. The title, the world of the playground, a children’s world, teachers’ world, paralleling the adult world, friendships and conflicts?
2. The location, the gates of the school, the playground itself, interiors, classrooms, swimming pools, exercise? The musical score?
3. The technique of the camera at children’s eye level, the audience viewing situations and people at children’s eyelevel?
4. Nora’s story, the strong performance and sense of reality, new school, arriving with her father, her brother ahead of her, her reluctance, tears, resistance, finally telling her name?
5. Nora’s growth and change during the period, her age, quiet, not making friends, gradually making contact, meals, classes, the playground, conversations, the other girls, some reluctance, gradual friendship, the possibility of going to Victoire’s party? The observing of the bullying of her brother, trying to help, his resistance, not to tell their father, her deciding to tell him, the consequences for her brother, for her?
6. Nora, growing in strength, determination, her difficulties in class, reading, writing on the board, athletics, falling, the swimming?
7. Abel, his age, the bullying, the four boys, their arrogance, punching in the playground, head in the toilet, putting him in the bin? His reactions, not telling his father? Nora and her intervention, seeing Abel in the bin, the meeting of the parents, the forced apologies, focus on Nora’s face and her hearing the apologies and the shaking hands?
8. Nora, the discussions with her father, his not having a job, his explanations, her embarrassment?
9. The sympathetic teachers, listening, talking, helping Nora? The other teachers, discipline, busy? Stopping fights?
10. The change in Abel, the small boy, the bullying, the bag over the head? Nora, her reaction, her misbehaviour in class, stubbornness and throwing things, out in the corridor? Her coming to the rescue of the boy against her brother?
11. The final scene, the brother and his transition from bully to bullying, Nora and the embrace, the embrace of the two?

COLD/ KUDLI

Iceland, 2023, 98 minutes, Colour.

Johannes Hauker Johannesson, Elin Hall, Mikael Kaaber, Olof Halla Johannesdottir.

Directed by Erlingur Thoroddsen.

During the 2010s and 2020s, Scandinavian Noir  was very popular in television series from the different Scandinavian countries.

This drama/thriller is in this vein.

The main story takes place in the 2020s, opening with what looks like the suicide of a woman from a balcony on a high-rise building. It then focuses on her husband and daughter, the daughter lonely, not making friends, relying on her drawings, her relationship with her father and her grandmother, the mother of the dead woman. The father has a job in social welfare and is commissioned to investigate mysterious happenings and deaths at an institution in the 1980s.

A lot of the action takes place in the 1980s, the severity of the institution, the harsh woman in charge, the boys sent there for various reasons. The main focus is on the young woman who does the domestic work, observing the severity, befriending some of the boys, wanting to move on and take some of the boys with her. Which leads to dramatic tensions, a pregnancy, the contrast with the difficult birth of a child for the woman in charge, and an explanation of the deaths.

However, in the 21^st-century, the investigator realises there are some links of this story to his own story, discussions with his mother-in-law – the young woman working at the institution.

But, in the Scandinavian Noir tradition, there are some unexpected twists in the plot, and no desire for a very happy ending. And audiences will need to pay attention to the final credits and the range of sketches and moods that are presented, the work of the young daughter.

1. Title? Iceland and climate? Themes of emotional coldness and consequences? (And the ironic opening of indicating that the time was summer and the need to buy curtains?)
2. The opening, the distraught woman, standing at the edge, her falling? Assumption of suicide? The final explanation? And the final accusation against her husband?
3. The 21^st-century story, Odinn, at home, late, taking Run to school, his job, social services, co-worker, the home for children in the 1980s, the files, the mysterious deaths, his investigations, the time in the archives, devotion to his daughter? Her reaction to her mother’s death, her age, not making friends? The importance of her drawings?
4. The flashbacks to the 1980s, the home, Lilja and her severe management, the meal scene at the table, her partner, his physical attack on the boy during the meal? Setting the tone? The group of boys, the personalities, the reasons for their being in care? The background story of Lilja, her pregnancy, the difficult birth, the boy helping, the coathanger, the death of the child, the burial under the tree?
5. Aldis and her story, her age, working in the house, domestic chores, her mother in the Institute, her later phone call, asking about the meaning of the Shadow song, the boys asking about her future, saving money, not certain? The eerie atmosphere? Her relationship to Lilja, suspicions about a relationship with her partner, the number of the girls who had left?
6. Einar, his place at the house, his background, meetings with Aldis, their discussions, the relationship, the effect on Aldis, her leaving? The other boys, Tobbi and his help, her wanting to rescue him? Leaving, the confrontation with Lilja, the vehicle, Shadow song on the cassette, the threats?
7. The boys in the vehicle, the arguments, the fight? Lilja closing the vehicle, the gas, their deaths? The effect on Aldis?
8. Odinn, making the connections of the story to his life, the significance of his mother-in-law, the revelation that she was Aldis, that the dead woman was her daughter, her relationship with Run? The years passing, tough? The discussions with Odinn, the explanations of the past? Her story, her relationship with her daughter, granddaughter?
9. The buildup to the climax, Odinn and his concern about Run, seeing her drawings, the realisation of what it happened? The flashbacks to the confrontation between mother and daughter, Run pushing her mother over the balcony? Run, the mental disorder, sending her mother to a better place? And her father in the car, killing him? And the media saying that he had committed suicide because he killed his wife?
10. Prospects for the future, Run and a mental condition, the intervention of her grandmother – and her possibly killing her grandmother?
11. The visuals of the sketches and their sinister aspects during the final credits?

1. The title, the time of day, dusk/dawn, the colour blue?
2. Thailand, the settings, homes, the pool and its being abandoned, the wasteland, the water and the sea? Atmospheric? The musical score?
3. The style of Thai filmmaking, more contemplative, lingering, unhurried, the camera spending long time in takes on locations, the characters, close-ups? The effect for the audience, to ponder and reflect?
4. The gay theme, hostile family reactions, teenagers, online connections, meetings, sexual encounters? Consequences? Mutual understanding, loving response? Companionship?
5. The focus on Tam age, approach, entering the pool grounds, hesitations, the meeting with Phum, hesitancy, some communication, the sexual encounter, the consequences, in the water? The leaves in the water, yet Phum and his urging to look to the sky through the water?
6. The consequences for Tam, at home, the conversations with his mother, her strictness, yet her love, his father’s attitudes? His brother, criminal connections, denunciations of Tam? Tam, the accusations of stealing, his trying to hurt his father, the objects stolen? The Buddha statue? His staying out, irregular behaviour at home?
7. Phum, his story, away from home, gay, freedom? The story about the land and its being taken from his family?
8. The visit, the wasteland, ugly, Tam by himself, the discovery of the corpse, the consequences? Phum and his explanations?
9. The ghostly atmosphere, suggestion of other worlds, the Buddhist-Thai context?
10. At what stage did the audience wonder about reality and imagination, hallucinations, what was real, what was in Tam’s mind?
11. The suggestion and interpretation that everything was in Tam’s mind, the creation of Phum, alter ego, unity, compensation, conflict? Family projections? The buildup to violence, his parents, his brother, criminal activity. deaths?
12. The final resolution, in realistic terms with Phum and the family? In psychological terms, double personality, identity, eruption into violence?

UNE ANNEE DIFFICILE/A DIFFICULT YEAR

France, 2023, 120 minutes, Colour.

Pio Marmai, Jonathan Cohen, Noemie Merlant,  Mathieu Amalric.

Directed by Olivier Nakache, Eric Toledano..

Audiences seeing the name of the writers-directors, Olivier Nakache, Eric Toledano, might have had high hopes, remembering their very popular film, The Inseparables, with Omar Sy and François Cluzet, the invalid and his minder, and the Omar Sy vehicle, Samba. There they showed quite an insight into human nature as well as a humorous tone.

There is some insight into human nature in this film and some humour, but not in the engaging way of their previous films.

There are two central characters, many on hard times, Albert (Pio Marmai) who works at an airport, sleeping rough there, scrounging for a living, and Bruno (Jonathan Cohen) also finding difficulty after his separation from his wife and family. On the humorous side, they find various ways in which to eke out some kind of survival, food and drink, shelter.

But, the focus of the film and the difficult year is that they encounter a protest group, led by Noemi Merlant, who is appearing in a great number of films in the 2020s, French and international. Her name is Cactus. She takes a shine to Albert and he to her – but the main thing that the two men find in attending the meetings to discuss the protests and a range tactics and manoeuvres, is that they get free meal and drink.

There are scenes of protest, contemporary climate causes, and an elaborate sequence where Albert and Bruno impersonate banking executives during the bank protest, get into their documents to manipulate their financial situation, then disguise themselves as workmen…

This is a French film so there is not an easy romantic ending. The scenario and the treatment may appeal strongly to a French sensibility – perhaps less so to those outside France.

1. Title, the initial collage of prime ministers repeating the phrase? Setting the tone? Serious, humorous, sardonic?
2. French cities, the streets and demonstrations, centres for meetings, airports, shops, banks…? Atmosphere? The musical score, songs?
3. The story of Albert and Bruno? The backgrounds, age, hard times, their friendship, mutual help? Albert the airport, stealing the contraband, selling it, financial support? Sleeping at the airport? Bruno, family, separation, his uncertainties, suicidal thoughts?
4. The relationship between the two, mutual support, the encounter with the protest group, welcoming, free meals and drink, their opportunism? The effect on them?
5. The protesters, the cause, serious, comic, the touch of satire, the meetings, the arguments, designing protests, carrying them out?
6. Cactus, her leadership, strength of mind, the interactions with Albert, the attraction? Her being a motivation for them to continue the meetings, to protest?
7. Albert and Bruno in the protest, their disguises, getting into the bank, getting the documents, altering the documents, pretending to be workers, on the balcony, the success?
8. Their unmasking, the discovery of the fraud? Unmasked with the group, with Cactus, her response?
9. Henri, his advice, the sessions, his mantras, the effect on them? His own difficulties, going to the casino, the various arguments, his gambling habit, his being ejected, disguises? Yet the seriousness of his working with Albert and Bruno?
10. Albert, the furniture, Bruno helping, carrying, selling on the black market, Cactus discovering the truth? The consequences?
11. How seriously was the audience meant to take the protesters, their cause, the behaviour? In comparison with the satiric story of Albert and Bruno?

MERCHANT/IVORY

UK, 2023, 110 minutes, Colour.

Directed by Stephen Soucy.

Many filmgoers will have very happy memories of the names Merchant/Ivory. There will be going back to A Room with a View, Howard’s End, Remains of the Day and other films produced by Ismail Merchant and directed by James ivory. But, the company had a 40 year history, initially filming in India, then in the US and, in their heyday, in Britain.

The great advantage is throughout the film, the interview with James Ivory himself as he moves towards his mid--90s, as well as footage over the decades.

Film buffs will especially appreciate this documentary as it opens with a survey of the team’s achievements, introducing quite a number of actors from their films who contribute anecdotes as well as insights, especially Helena Bonham Carter, Vanessa Redgrave, Rupert Graves, Hugh Grant, Emma Thompson, Greta Scacchi, Simon Callow, James Fox, James Wilby, Samuel West, Madhur Jaffrey… There are quite a number of members of the company, producers, editors, costume and set designers… who all are given quite a significant amount of time for their commentary.

The film is designed in chapters after this overview prologue, a portrait of James ivory himself, American, gay, meticulous filmmaker long career and an Oscar in 2018 for Best Adapted Screenplay for Call Me by your Name. Later there is a portrait of Indian Ismail Merchant, family background, education in the US, producer extraordinaire with more than a touch of the conman and bluff especially for raising money, partner with Ivory, personal partnership for 40 years. In fact, there is also a chapter on Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, German born novelist, long resident in India and England, Booker Prize winner, writer of so many of the Merchant Ivory screenplays.

The audiences may not have seen the films that Merchant/Ivory made in the 1970s and 1980s in India, Householder, Shakespeare Wallah, but they will find this chapter unexpected and interesting.

And, there is also a chapter on sexual orientation issues, the partnership of James ivory and Ismail Merchant, their resident composer, Richard Robbins, ivory explaining his experience of his homosexuality, the contrast with reticence in India for Merchant, and, especially, their 1987 film, Maurice, from E.M.  Forster’s novel published only after the novelist’s death) but bringing the orientation issues to a wider public, the reputation enhanced by the success two years earlier with A Room with a View.

A great deal of attention is given to the two adaptations from Forster novels, A Room with a View and Howard’s End. An opportunity for audiences to relive their experiences of watching these films. And, significant attention to one of their greatest achievements, Remains of the cab day.

Attention is given to some of the adaptations of novels by Henry James, especially The Bostonians. And the regrets that after Remains of the Day, the films did not have the same impact but, as is suggested, they are well worth seeing in the retrospect of the careers of Merchant/Ivory.

For audiences interested in cinema, for admirers of Merchant/Ivory, two hours well spent.

HARD TRUTHS

UK, 2024, 97 minutes, Colour.

Marianne Jean-Baptiste, Michele Austin, David Webber, Tuwaine Barrett, Ani Nelson, Sophia Brown, Jonathan Livingstone.

Directed by Mike Leigh.

Mike Leigh has been a significant writer-director in British cinema for many decades, creating the screenplay, getting his cast to improvise to create the dialogue. He has won many awards. He has made a great impression by dramatising British life – awards for films like Naked, Secrets and Lies, Another Year, Vera Drake… And he also made historical dramas especially Topsy-Turvey on Gilbert and Sullivan, and Mr Turner, about the artist.

This is a film from Mike Leigh in his 80s, delayed by the covid experience, partly financed from Spanish sources. But, it is set in London, in suburban streets and houses, looking around the district, in Trafalgar Square, but also in homes, hairdressers, doctors’ surgeries, the dentists, supermarkets, the areas of ordinary life.

The central characters come from families originally from the Caribbean, close-knit. But, they are seen in the context of contemporary British multicultural life.

At the centre is a middle-aged woman, Pansy, an extraordinary performance from Marianne Jean-Baptiste, so effective in Leigh’s Secrets and Lies. One reviewer referred to a “knockout performance”. Not entirely wrong because the nature of the performance is the knockout expression of Pansy’s continued anger, focused on herself, resentful, critical, unable to see the good in others or anything, and prone to extraordinary verbal outbursts which, for some may seem very funny, but for others may seem very serious, and concern about Pansy’s mental health.

At home, she is fussy, obsessively tidy, door shut, fears of insects, alarmed at a fox in the garden, continually criticising her long-suffering husband, a builder, continually criticising her 22-year-old unemployed son. She is concerned about her health, wants to sleep, continually angry.

A significant time is Mother’s Day, her cheery sister who has two lively daughters, is a hairdresser who looks after her sister but also becomes the butt of criticism, suggests they visit their mother’s grave at the cemetery. Pansy uses all kinds of excuses to delay her decision but eventually goes, is unhappy at the cemetery is her sister cares for the grave, reminisces about her mother’s severity and favouritism of her sister. She is persuaded to go to her sister’s house for dinner, her husband and son there, she refusing to eat, silent and critical while the others try to cope. But, this is to be something of a breakthrough, some moments of hysterical laughter, weeping – but will this be enough?

There is audience sympathy for the husband, silent and long-suffering, a back injury at work, a moment with a tear. And puzzle about the son, wondering whether he is on the spectrum, silent, in his room, computer games, books about planes, model plane.

Leigh’s home dramas are slices of life. And, in real life, Leigh is  he something of a curmudgeon himself and we wonder about what is projecting onto the character of Pansy and what he is saying about life’s hard experiences.

1. Mike Leigh film, expectations? The title, hard, grim – but the truth?
2. The British settings, suburbs, homes and streets, buildings sites, offices, wandering central London, the hairdresser’s…? The musical score?
3. The focus on British citizens, originally from the Caribbean, traditions, families, connections, language?
4. Issues in multicultural England?
5. Pansy Duncan, her story, her background, age, marriage to Kurtly, the years, attitude towards her son, Moses, her contact with her sister, styling hair, the conversations, her nieces?
6. Pansy, angry with the world, the reasons, memories of her mother and criticisms of her mother, her mother relying on her, her sister the favourite? Expectations? Relationship with her husband, demands on her son, her fastidious cleaning, keeping the door shut, insects, seeing the fox? The daily routines, wanting to sleep, concentration on her health, everything focused on her?
7. Marianne Jean-Baptiste at her performance, screen presence, her outbursts, verbal, complex, edge, at home, in the street, at the supermarket, inspecting the sofas and the attendant, and her hurried exit from the store, her behaviour towards the doctor, towards the dentist? Unrelenting? Audience response to such outbursts? Hearing them as funny? Hearing them as serious? Concern about her mental health? And her inability to get help, receive help?
8. Kurtly, quiet, patient, at work, with Virgil, Virgil and his conversations, the details of their work, curtly coming home, the harsh reception, criticism of him snoring, her time in bed, not preparing the meal, the getting the chicken take away? At work, his back, Virgil helping him home, Pansy and her reluctance to help, his sitting quietly, his tear?
9. Moses, age, no job, perhaps on the spectrum? Playing the games, books on planes, the model plane? Wandering around, his being taunted by the boys in the street? Mother’s Day, the continual attacks by his mother, his continued eating? Size? Buying the flowers for his mother, her reaction? With his cousins, the meal? His finally going for the walk, sitting in Trafalgar Square, the pleasant young woman, offering the sweets, talking, his smile? Future?
10. Chantelle, at the salon, her charm with the customers, the chatter? With Pansy? Doing her hair? The conversations? The arrangement to go to the cemetery, Pansy on and off, sharp with her sister? The phone calls? Her dressing up, going, the episode at the cemetery, the flowers, Pansy sitting back, observing, not wanting to be there, the memories of their mother?
11. Chantelle persuading Pansy to come for Mother’s Day, her daughters and cheeriness, the meal, Kurtly and Moses, at the table, Pansy and her refusal to eat, joining in the toast, leaving the room, Chantelle talking, not eating?
12. Pansy and her outburst, laughter, tears? Some release? But not enough? Going back home, the same thing happening again?
13. Chantelle’s daughters, seeing that work, discussions about the perfume, the haughty manager and her comments, the sympathetic manager? The other daughter, in the office, having to alter the files? The playfulness at home with their mother?
14. A slice of life in the Mike Leigh fashion?

BOMBSHELL: THE HEDY LAMAR STORY

US, 2017, 88 minutes, Colour.

Directed by Alexandra Dean.

Yes, this is another portrait of a Hollywood star. But, no, this is not the portrait of a conventional Hollywood star.

In the 1940s, Hedy Lamarr was at MGM, appearing in a number of conventional films, but admired very much for her beauty. But, she came to Hollywood with something of a scandal behind her, her appearance in the Viennese film, Ecstasy, her appearing nude and swimming nude. (Even Hitler voiced his displeasure at this.)

If there were nothing more to Hedy Lamar’s career than ecstasy and the glamour in Hollywood, this would be a conventional biography, details of her early life in Vienna, her parents and their influence, her early performances, her taking initiatives, the danger for Jews in Vienna, the move to England for safety, the encounter with Louis B Maher, on the boat, the better contract, his treatment of her and the choices of films, even to the parody of Whitecap cargo by Lucille ball on television.

And, the background is given to the several marriages, older men, entrepreneurs, actors, and her two children and their upbringing. In later years, there was a retirement from Hollywood, the development in Aspen Colorado, the children, health, painkillers and addictions, and her choice of surgery on her face – and the visual consequences are warning against this kind of beauty treatment.

However, Hedy Lamar was far more significant than this, the film showing that an early age she had a mind for machines, dismantling and putting together machines when she was five, a curious mind, scientific bent.

The film reveals a great deal about he Lamar, the war, her scientific ideas, the theory of moving frequencies, patenting it with a collaborator, George and tile, the relationship with the American forces, the use of material, the lapsing of the patented her not getting any financial remuneration, her not knowing the legal and military details.

A lot of the film comes from taped interviews in 1990 when Hedy Lamar was 75, her reflections on her scientific work and curiosity, the development of her theories, and some sequences where her theories were put into practice – and consequences for all kinds of developments over the decades, including aspects of Wi-Fi.

Towards the end of her life, she was finally honoured publicly, a humorous sequence where her son goes to receive the awards and acclaim and she phones him in the middle of it, the opportunity for her actually to make a speech over the telephone call with her son. Her son appears throughout the film, admiration for his mother. Her daughter also appears in extensive interviews.

So, a strange Hollywood story, a glamorous actress and that career path and its limitations, an intelligent woman with a scientific bent and the development in her life.

(One of the testimonies for her is given by Mel Brooks who speaks about his admiration for her when he was young and watching the film is and his calling his character in Blazing Saddles, a tribute to her, Hedley Lamarr.)

WOLFS

US, 2024, 98 minutes, Colour.

George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Amy Ryan, Austin Abrams.

Directed by Jon Watts.

Something of a surprise to find that a film with these two stars missed out on cinema release and sent straight to streaming. Not that it is a great film or anything like that, but it is the kind of film that audiences do enjoy.

Audiences who relished performances by George Clooney and by Brad Pitt over the decades, especially enjoying their work together in the Oceans 11, 12, 13 thrillers. They play off each other very well indeed – though, checking on ages, it is a bit of a surprise to find that the always boyish looking Brad Pitt is only two years younger than George Clooney.

The film opens with a compromising situation, a district attorney who is strong on moral standards (a glimpse of a poster of her claiming this during the film) has gone with a young man up to a hotel suite for a rendezvous, but, in his leaping excitedly on the bed, falls and hits his head. She has a phone number and calls it. No answer. Then a phone call back and the promise of one of those “cleaners” who come into work their magic to remove all traces in dire situations. He arrives. George Clooney.

And, then, who should arrive but another cleaner, Brad Pitt, employed by the management of the hotel. Then begins professional competition, a rivalry in techniques, claims of superiority – but they having to work together to remedy the situation. (And the audience themselves getting quite a few tips how to wrap a corpse and a carpet, hangers on one of those clothing trolleys, Tippett into the boot of the car!)

And since this all happens early in the film, where will it now go? Actually, the young man has a bag full of drugs which leads to all kinds of complications, tracking down the dealers, discovering at a wedding celebration Eastern European gangsters for whom each of them worked (and a comic situation at a wedding ceremony where they have to pretend to be at war with each other, guns drawn, in order to escape). It is that kind of scenario.

The other complication is the young man is not dead at all, and they have to use him to recover his pager from the bar where the wedding party is being held, to get him to go in with the drugs, the danger of his death from the dealers – or from Clooney himself.

As well that ends well, especially if the film is successful and there is a call for the Wolfs to be hired for another job.

1. George Clooney, Brad Pitt? Audience anticipation? The screen personalities, working with each other, from each other?
2. The New York settings, the hotels and hotel rooms, the streets, the marriage celebration lavish, seedy situations for drug dealers? The musical score, the range of songs – Smooth Operator?
3. The initial situation, the woman in the room, the body on the floor, getting her bag, splashed with blood? The phone call, the return call, the interrogation? The cleaner turning up, his personality, unsmiling, efficient? The knock on the door, the second cleaner, his appearance, similarities, assured, the setting up of confrontation between the two?
4. The theme throughout the film, the similarities, dissimilarities, competitive, suspicious, individualist, give-and-take, rivalries? The George Clooney-Brad Pitt interactions?

The situation in the hotel room, the woman as an Assistant District Attorney, the glimpse of her poster during the film advocating morality? Her shock, the story, the bar, the young man, in the room, his jumping on the bed, hitting his head, the assumption that he was dead? The two cleaners, the clothes, getting her to her daughter, covering the situation, sending her home?

5. The reality of the surveillance camera – and the sequence of the credits, the playing of this footage? And who had it?
6. The manager of the hotel, the control, advice? The rivalry, Margaret’s man and his techniques for turning the body, wrapping it, putting it in the stand? Out into the corridor, the elevator, making the surveillance cameras, the technique of getting it into the boot of the car?
7. The discovery of the drugs, further complications? The irony that the young man was not dead, punched, quiet?
8. The development of the situation with the young man, the drugs, taking into the mutual friend, her handling the situation, the irony that she knew both of them, their reactions?
9. Speculation about the drugs and their origins? The various gangs?
10. The young man, getting out of the car, the chase, the long chase sequence, the running, the driving, his derring-do, finally caught?
11. The issue of the drugs, his explanation of his situation, studies, exams, his friend, the drugs, experimenting, going up to the room, the accident? The issue of the pager at the bar?
12. Going to the wedding celebration, the young man going to the bar, the issue with the pager, his being evicted? The cleaners, caught up in the dance, the guns and their performance, the bluff, the fear that they would be killed because of their knowledge?
13. The finale, going to the rendezvous, the various gangs, their car being shot up, the dead coming out of the building, their going in, finding the young man, the thought of killing him, not doing it, the other cleaner firing into the drugs, leaving a more credible situation?
14. The two, taking the young man home, the talk with his father?
15. The finale, the gunmen and their threats, the end?

DON'T MOVE

US, 2024, 92 minutes, Colour.

Kelsey Asbillel, Finn Wittrock, Moray Treadwell.

Directed by Brian Netto, Adam Schindler.

A surprisingly effective thriller.

In the past, there were many films about women in distress, in peril, set upon by misogynistic man. But, especially with the advent of the me too movement, such films portray strong women, standing up to the misogynistic violence and threats.

This film opens with a sympathetic portrait of a woman whose son has been killed in an accident on the mountain, depressed, suicidal, driving to the mountain and the shrine she had set up there for her son, standing on the edge of the precipice. Suddenly, there is a sympathetic man who is vengeful top, is gentle in his conversation, supportive, the sad story of his own, able to bring her away from the cliffs edge. As we soon see, his manner is completely deceptive.

In fact, he is a psychotic killer. And, somewhat surprisingly, we discover that he is happily married and a father, his wife wanted to come to visit him at his country hideaway. But, he has injected the mother and she is about to paralysed the unconscious.

In confronting the murderous attack, the film shows the woman using her wits, assessing situations, moments of escape, the oncoming analysis and her awareness of what this would mean, receiving help at one stage from a kindly farmer, but increasing menace.

Audiences, men and women, will be on the side of the mother and the dangerous situation, repelled by the psychotic those seemingly charming at moments killer.

As a contributor to this kind of misogynistic that women standing up for themselves thriller, this film is very effective.

1. The title, thriller, predatory man, strong woman?
2. The settings, the countryside, the coast, the mountains, the backwoods, the house, the highway, service station, the lake? The musical score? Finishing with You Don’t Own Me?
3. The introduction to Iris, in bed, her husband, the drive, the scenery, climbing the mountain, the shrine to her son, standing at the cliff, intention of suicide?
4. Richard suddenly appearing, pleasant, not obtrusive, the conversation, gradually drawing Iris out, her story, his story about the accident and Chloe, cars? His charm? Climbing down, the cars, her being trapped? The injection?
5. Richard and his unmasking as a predator, surface charm, sociopath? The conversation, his taunting Iris, describing what would happen? Driving away?
6. Iris, injected, the gradual transformation, his explanations, her lessening of her powers, his taunts, her response, the reaction, the crashing of the car? Her escape, running through the woods, testing her feelings, her fingers, hiding under the log, the ants on her face, into the water, floating unable to swim, the log, on land? Hearing the motor coming?
7. William, finding Iris, his concern, her being able to blink, assessing the situation, the wheelbarrow, into the house? The terror, to phone the police?
8. Richard at the door, the intrusion, his story, the injuries, his skill at improvising the details for his story, telling the story of his wife, her drinking, running away, the crash? William and his response, growing suspicions, the phone call, the clash, the fight, his death?
9. Richard, dousing the house, setting it alight, Iris tapping, closing the blind, Richard in the car, realising she was there, bringing her to the car, driving away?
10. The service station, the little boy looking in the window, Iris and the seatbelt, her looking at people moving freely? Driving away, the phone call, the revelation about Richard/Andy and his wife, his daughter and her exams, his weekends away? The family coming to his camp?
11. Finding the crashed car, trying to link it, the police stopping, the interrogation, suspicions, the expired license, Richard brutally hitting the policeman, in the car, setting it alight?
12. Coming to the lake, on the wharf, on the boat, Richard and his taunts, Iris and her taunts, cutting her cords, the gun, shooting, Richard in the water? But the holes in the boat, sinking?
13. Iris surfacing, the final confrontation with Richard? Her survival?
14. A strong film with a female stance, victimised but not wanting to be a victim?